https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68606 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition for unexplained investment in jewellery, as it belonged to the assessee's wife. The addition based on entries in seized material was also deleted due to lack of evidence linking them to the assessee. The Tribunal agreed with the partial addition for marriage expenses but reduced the amount. Additionally, the Tribunal confirmed the addition for unexplained investment in building materials. Both the Revenue's appeal and the assessee's cross-objection were dismissed, with the Tribunal supporting the CIT(A)'s findings throughout. en-us Tue, 11 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 03 Sep 2011 18:22:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68606 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition for unexplained investment in jewellery, as it belonged to the assessee's wife. The addition based on entries in seized material was also deleted due to lack of evidence linking them to the assessee. The Tribunal agreed with the partial addition for marriage expenses but reduced the amount. Additionally, the Tribunal confirmed the addition for unexplained investment in building materials. Both the Revenue's appeal and the assessee's cross-objection were dismissed, with the Tribunal supporting the CIT(A)'s findings throughout. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 11 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68606